Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-15-2019, 09:43 AM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
4,490 posts, read 3,698,075 times
Reputation: 5255

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
I don't think so. Americans have a surprisingly positive view of Iranians from my experience, but I think this impression is false.

Outside of Tehran with a few hip cafes, malls, and young people, Iran is an aging society with conservative and local politics.

Does this mean they deserve to die? No.

But once the image of Iran as a young and progressive (relatively) society dies, there will be no saving it from total destruction.


That's the question, is Iran still progressive or is it being muted by the very powerful regime there? That so-called regime has made it through protests, random uprisings, sanctions, etc. I understand Bolton and war-hawks want to change the regime so perhaps we have a chance of having a relationship there - or would we destroy the country in order to get the regime out of there?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-15-2019, 09:48 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
27,044 posts, read 13,295,225 times
Reputation: 19272
Quote:
Originally Posted by fibonacci View Post
Good god, Bolton is bat S insane. Literally a lunatic hell-bent on starting wars with everyone. How many trillions of dollars are we going to flush down the toilet over the next 20 years on Iran. Chill out for once GOP. Can we at least go one GOP term where you haven't started a war that costs crazy amounts of money? And then our European allies will have to deal with the influx of millions of more refugees due to our intervention where we shouldn't be.

But Bolton....man that dude needs to be neutered like a dog. He is a threat to the entire country.


Major General Chris Ghika who is with the Brtish Army in Baghdad, has openly stated that "there's been no increased threat from Iranian-backed forces in Iraq and Syria". However his comments have been rebuked by the current US Administration.

According to some media reports the US is preparing heavy bombers, missiles, aircraft carriers and 120,000 additional troops.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Telegraph

The United States has publicly rebuked a senior British general who challenged claims that Iranian-backed groups are preparing to mount attacks against Western assets in the Middle East.

The extraordinary move came after Major General Chris Ghika, the deputy commander of Operation Inherent Resolve, the US-led coalition against Islamic State, said that there was no increased threat from pro-Iranian groups in Iraq and Syria.

In recent days Donald Trump's administration has said that Iran is preparing its allied and proxy forces to mount attacks on US assets across the Middle East, and has sent an aircraft carrier strike group, a squadron of B-52 bombers, and a battery of patriot missiles to the region to counter the alleged threat.

Pentagon officials have also reportedly drawn up options to send up to 120,000 additional troops in preparation for a large-scale military campaign. But when reporters in the Pentagon asked Maj Gen Ghika about the claims on Tuesday, he said: "No, there's been no increased threat from Iranian-backed forces in Iraq and Syria."Speaking by video-link from Baghdad, he said: "We're aware of their presence, clearly, and we monitor them, along with a whole range of others because that's the environment we're in."

Speaking by video-link from Baghdad, he said: "We're aware of their presence, clearly, and we monitor them, along with a whole range of others because that's the environment we're in." He added: "I am not going to go into the detail of it, but there are a substantial number of militia groups in Iraq and Syria and we don't see an increased threat from many of them at this stage." Hours later the US military disowned the British general's comments and directly contradicted him.

The British Ministry of Defence said: "Major General Ghika speaks as a military officer in the US-led Coalition focused on the fight against Daesh in Iraq and Syria. His comments are based on the day to day military operations and his sole focus is the enduring defeat of Daesh.

US rebukes British general on Iran as it orders embassy staff to leave Iraq - The Telegraph



Last edited by Brave New World; 05-15-2019 at 09:57 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2019, 09:56 AM
 
Location: In The Thin Air
12,566 posts, read 10,587,989 times
Reputation: 9247
Quote:
Originally Posted by shanv3 View Post
Left 's desperate warmongering. Avoiding this war will define Trump s strength of character. He somehow resisted the Syrian war temptation, knowing well that its not Americas to fight.

Remember, if this war goes through , more American young men will be sent to frontline. If Elites want more money, give them more tax breaks.
The left is warmongering? You are in a bizarro world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2019, 10:01 AM
 
7,800 posts, read 4,385,547 times
Reputation: 9438
Trump's run up to the pending conflict with Iran will be W. redux, but with differences.


The similarities are conservatives will follow like lemmings when Iran is declared a threat. Conservative commentators will line up and trash anyone as unpatriotic who opposes the war. Intelligence will be fabricated and lies told and promulgated.


The differences now however is with our allies. The will not be fooled by the greatest fool to ever hold the presidency. They know the Trump/Bolton/Pompeo alliance of stupidity is just itching for a war. They know they are fabricating lies. They will not join in this boondoogle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2019, 10:04 AM
 
28,623 posts, read 18,677,825 times
Reputation: 30904
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Now Saudi Arabia is accusing Iran of blowing up some oil pipelines in Yemen, none of this makes any sense.
The US is being played. Saudi Arabia is putting their Nixon Petrodollar card on the table.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2019, 10:11 AM
 
Location: alexandria, VA
16,352 posts, read 8,064,641 times
Reputation: 9726
Quote:
Originally Posted by HouseBuilder328 View Post
That's the question, is Iran still progressive or is it being muted by the very powerful regime there? That so-called regime has made it through protests, random uprisings, sanctions, etc. I understand Bolton and war-hawks want to change the regime so perhaps we have a chance of having a relationship there - or would we destroy the country in order to get the regime out of there?
We need to destroy Iran in order to save it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2019, 10:12 AM
 
28,623 posts, read 18,677,825 times
Reputation: 30904
Quote:
Originally Posted by HouseBuilder328 View Post
That's the question, is Iran still progressive or is it being muted by the very powerful regime there? That so-called regime has made it through protests, random uprisings, sanctions, etc. I understand Bolton and war-hawks want to change the regime so perhaps we have a chance of having a relationship there - or would we destroy the country in order to get the regime out of there?
When did the US become the arbiter of which nations need their regimes changed, and that the US should do it?

If the US smashes the current Iranian government, how is that not going to result in the rise of yet another international terrorist organization--this one being Shiite and a direct danger to the US that Iran has never been before? Who is going to run it? Who is going to make it a modern, liberal democracy--that Libya, Iraq, Somalia, Syria, Afghanistan, et cetera, have never become?

And worse, it removes from the table an obstacle to the Sunni terrorism that has been a direct danger to the US.

Right now Saudi Arabia has to funnel money and effort into its 1400-year-long war against the Shiites of Iran.

Once the US has smashed Iran for them, Saudi Arabia will be free to funnel all its money and energy into radical Sunni Wahhabism to terrorize the West with even greater intensity than ever before.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2019, 10:13 AM
 
Location: New York Area
34,750 posts, read 16,767,477 times
Reputation: 29888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Iran is one of the most progressive countries in the ME, they aren’t going anywhere and it would be in our interests to work out a diplomatic solution rather than this ridiculous posturing.
What would the West surrender in this diplomatic solution? Just the State of Israel?
Quote:
Originally Posted by fibonacci View Post
Good god, Bolton is bat S insane. Literally a lunatic hell-bent on starting wars with everyone. How many trillions of dollars are we going to flush down the toilet over the next 20 years on Iran. Chill out for once GOP. Can we at least go one GOP term where you haven't started a war that costs crazy amounts of money? And then our European allies will have to deal with the influx of millions of more refugees due to our intervention where we shouldn't be.

But Bolton....man that dude needs to be neutered like a dog. He is a threat to the entire country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by r small View Post
Bolton is the only person on the planet that still thinks that the invasion of Iraq was a major success. Scary.
I guess that you would prefer to allow that part of the world to romp over us at will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmyy View Post
The left is warmongering? You are in a bizarro world.
These people think that Chamberlain was a good model for "peace for our time." Maybe he really said "pieces for our time." Their version of "peace" is to be loved by the suave, urbane denizens of NYC's UN building.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2019, 10:20 AM
 
28,623 posts, read 18,677,825 times
Reputation: 30904
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
What would the West surrender in this diplomatic solution? Just the State of Israel?
Israel is the strongest state in the region. They have nukes. They can take care of themselves. If they need the US to sell them more beans and bullets, the US can do that. But the US does not need to fight a pre-emptive war for Israel.

Quote:
I guess that you would prefer to allow that part of the world to romp over us at will.
What blue-water navy or intercontinental aircraft are they going to use for that effort?

You're really talking about them having a capacity to keep the US from romping over them at will.

There is a particular attitude in the US that the US should be able to screw anyone at any time and their only permissible response is to smile and let it happen.

The only thing Iran has been doing wrong in its relationship with the US since the 1950s is to demand, "Stop screwing us. We don't like you for screwing us. Stop it."

And for that, they must be destroyed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2019, 10:22 AM
 
Location: Manchester NH
15,507 posts, read 6,400,865 times
Reputation: 4831
Quote:
Originally Posted by HouseBuilder328 View Post
That's the question, is Iran still progressive or is it being muted by the very powerful regime there? That so-called regime has made it through protests, random uprisings, sanctions, etc. I understand Bolton and war-hawks want to change the regime so perhaps we have a chance of having a relationship there - or would we destroy the country in order to get the regime out of there?
I went to Iran a few months ago to see family, it has changed in a few ways from just a few years ago.

Outside of Tehran, and even in it, there is an aging population that is still pretty religious.

Now its true that Iran as a society is less tribal and more contemporary than Saudi Arabia, etc. and its religious people aren't as extreme as there counterparts. That being said the young society that is normally talked about is dying away due to low birth rates and brain-drain (sanctions are making life hard and the regime isn't popular).

On the other hand, a lot of its local culture is degrading from increased materialism and new fancy malls, its becoming Americanized in a consumer sense.

In that way I see it as the worst of both worlds, and aging and financial struggling society with increased materialism for non necessary goods.

I'm worried that once Americans stop viewing Iran as a 'progressive society' war will be much more palatable for the public to agree to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:43 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top